Assault is a violent crime defined as the application of force to another person without their consent (Criminal Code Act of 1899). A combination of social learning, social bonds, and personality theory can be used to explain why some people may commit aggression and how to prevent those same people from doing so. Social learning theory states that criminal behavior can be learned from others, such that an individual may commit aggression after witnessing other behavior. Social bond theory posits that rather than an individual having a specific motivation to commit a crime, they instead engage in criminal activity due to the lack of social bonds and that aggression may therefore be the result of 'an absence of dissuasive factors. Personality theory holds that people may commit crimes due to the presence of antisocial personality traits. Antisocial personality traits demonstrated by people diagnosed with psychopathy are conducive to aggression. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayAker's social learning theory posits that people adopt criminal behavior after learning it from others. Social learning theory considers that a person can learn behavior in several ways, including imitation and observation; this is when one person observes the actions and consequences of another and begins to imitate those behaviors. When criminal behavior is considered acceptable or has few or no consequences, the person who witnesses it may later model the behavior, knowing that they themselves are doing something desirable or will do facing few consequences. This premise was demonstrated in the bobo doll experiment. The study showed that children who saw an adult interact violently with the doll without being reprimanded, acted more violently during their own interactions with the doll. In contrast, children who had seen the violent adult being reprimanded for their actions or who had not seen an adult act violently with the doll acted less violently during their turn. Consistent with this theory, a child who witnesses someone inciting aggression and has their action rewarded or ignored may later model this behavior. The majority of children who witness abuse do so in the context of domestic violence; it is estimated that this occurs in one in ten households. Underreporting of domestic violence and the difficulty of obtaining a conviction may lead children to understand that these acts have few consequences (Mugford 1989). This may lead these individuals to view violent actions as an effective means of achieving a desired outcome. While this explains the actions of one group of offenders, there are also many people from households in which domestic violence occurs who do not exhibit these criminogenic behaviors later in life. Additionally, this theory does not account for offenders who engage in violent offenses and who have never witnessed this behavior. The difference between children who adopt these behaviors later in life and those who do not can be explained using social bond theory. Hirchi's social bond theory concludes that offenders commit crime due to the absence of strong social bonds, rather than because of a strong social bond.specific motivation and that all individuals would commit crime in the absence of these links. Hirchi states that social bonds consist of four main elements: attachment, commitment, involvement and belief. Attachment refers to relationships with others and the value placed on their opinions, such as family and friends. Engagement refers to the value an individual places on conventional behavior, this type of social connection is strengthened by participation in conventional behavior such as education or employment. Involvement refers to a person's participation in shared activities, such as recreational sports or studies. Belief refers to the value a person places on the common morals of society, this normally manifests itself as a belief in the correctness of the law. According to Hirchi, the stronger each of these ties, the higher the likelihood that an individual will maintain social norms, including lack of participation in criminal activity. According to this theory, an offender would commit aggression because the lack of strong social bonds means there is no meaningful deterrent. the weakening of each of these social bonds means that the offender would have few perceived consequences for any violent action they might take. A person who does not participate in extracurricular activities, does not have a job, and does not have close relationships loses far less than the average citizen if imprisoned for a violent crime. These factors, in addition to a lack of trust in the law, make these individuals much more likely to participate in criminal activity. These social bonds may be weaker in households experiencing domestic violence, as family dynamics are likely to weaken the relationship between parent and child. There may also be a lack of participation in extracurricular activities, as a common abuse tactic prevents connections outside the family unit. A study from California shows that children with weak parental bonds are also less likely to form strong bonds with their peers. These effects can be further exacerbated if the individual exhibits antisocial personality traits. Personality theory posits that some people are attracted to criminal activity because they possess personality traits conducive to criminal behavior. Traits such as narcissism, aggression, impulsivity and hostility are classified under disorders such as psychopathy. A person who exhibits these traits can be assessed and diagnosed accordingly. People diagnosed with psychopathy exhibit a variety of antisocial behaviors such as: a lack of guilt or remorse, aggression, thrill-seeking, narcissism, and an inability to form meaningful emotional connections. This theory considers that a person diagnosed with psychopathy would commit aggression out of disrespect towards the victim, due to their abnormal personality traits. An aggressive disposition, impulsivity, and lack of guilt would make a psychopath more likely to commit aggression, as they are more likely to act before fully considering the consequences. The inability to form meaningful emotional connections, in addition to their self-centered nature, means that the individual is also less likely to care about the consequences their actions may have on the victim. This can be demonstrated by the high percentage of psychopaths incarcerated for serious crimes, of which they make up over 50% of offenders, compared to their much smaller demographic in the mainstream population. There..